What will the presidential transition mean for US aid implementers?

As Donald Trump takes office for a second time as president of the United States, the future of U.S. foreign aid programs remains clouded with uncertainty. Who will lead the U.S. Agency for International Development? How long will it take for the new team to settle in — and will we see large numbers of career staff members head for the exits? What does it all mean for the funding and programs so many organizations rely on? George Ingram, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former senior USAID official, and David Berteau, president and CEO of the Professional Services Council, a coalition of U.S. government contractors, weighed in on what USAID’s partners can expect during this transition. One takeaway from their years of collective experience: we might be waiting a while for clear answers. Past administrations often didn’t get a USAID administrator in place until late spring or even summer. As of this moment, we’re still playing the nominee guessing game when it comes to key foreign assistance posts. Regardless, the transition could cause hiccups for USAID’s partners, especially for programs tied to hot-button issues such as family planning and climate change. Funding freezes and policy reviews are likely, and Trump’s arrival could be even more disruptive than usual — though some of the biggest impacts could come further down the line as new policies start to take shape. Here’s what to expect, according to two people who have been through this process many times before: 1. How long will it be until a new USAID administrator is in place? Ingram: “It's pretty clear that it will be a while before the administrator is in place. Typically the aid administrator is down the line in being nominated and being confirmed. Frequently it's even late spring before we get there. From what we have seen so far, USAID is not high on the agenda for this incoming administration, because we haven't heard one word about it. So I'm expecting, I would guess, in place late spring, early summer.” Berteau: “If past is prologue, we will not know for several months. Samantha Power was announced January 13, 2021 [a week before President Biden’s inauguration]. Her confirmation hearing was March 23, and she was confirmed by the Senate April 28. In the first Trump Administration, Mark Green was announced May 10, 2017. His confirmation hearing was June 15, and he was confirmed by the Senate August 3. As of January 16, 2025, we have not seen a name for USAID or Acting Administrator.” 2. Who will be in charge in the meantime? Ingram: “Typically the USAID counselor [currently Clinton White]. When Trump came in before, they did not honor that practice, and they brought Gloria Steele [a former senior USAID official] back from retirement, which was a good choice. So it's anybody's guess as to who they will put in charge.” 3. Should implementing partners expect funding delays as a result of the presidential transition? Ingram: “Yes. You can expect politically sensitive programs — like family planning and climate change — for that funding to be held up both by the administration and by the Republican committees on [Capitol] Hill. Will there be a blanket holding on funding? I don't expect that. On the other hand, where I would be concerned is come September, when the Office of Management and Budget might hold up funding so that it expires. In the short term, I’d be concerned over those few programs and policies that have received negative political attention.” Berteau: “It is common for incoming administrations to freeze funding in the early days of taking office, so it would not be surprising to see an announcement [shortly after] inauguration. We have seen no indication of USAID being different than other agencies.” 4. What happens to the Biden administration’s foreign aid policies and strategies? Do they immediately become irrelevant, or will there be some kind of review process? Ingram: "Typically, from one administration to the next, the prior administration's policies have not been erased. The new administration has built on the policies and made changes at the margins. So, something like the Biden administration's policies on modernizing private sector engagement — there’s no reason why that wouldn’t go ahead and be built on. Their digital policies — no reason why that wouldn't go ahead and be built on. But can we assume Biden's policy on climate change is no longer operative? Yes, I think that will be the case. It should be reviewed policy by policy." Berteau: “We have three sources of information on this: what was stated during the campaign by candidate Trump and his circles, what was done under the first Trump administration, and what Congress is saying. Senator Marco Rubio, in his January 15 confirmation hearing as the expected nominee for Secretary of State, indicated a number of priorities, but he did not commit to a formal review process. It’s worth noting also that [fiscal year 2025] funding is still uncertain, with significant differences between the House and Senate appropriations markups. Congress may play a substantial role in retaining, altering, or terminating programs and policies.” 5. Do all USAID political appointees resign when the new administration takes office? What are the likely impacts of that kind of turnover? Ingram: "Typically, every new administration replaces all senior political appointees. It’s very seldom that any of those hold over from one administration to the next if there's a change of parties. The issue isn't the elimination of political appointees, but the retirement of career professionals and the potential brain drain. ... There’s a sizable portion of the aid cadre at a senior level who are at retirement age, and others at a mid-level may be questioning whether they want to work in this administration." Berteau: “Most transitions to a new administration require all political appointees to submit a letter of resignation. Agencies, including USAID, formally designate career personnel to fill, on an acting basis, necessary political positions. At this time, we do not know the extent to which those acting career individuals will be replaced by incoming political appointees, perhaps in an acting capacity, or the speed with which such replacements may be designated. Some positions may remain vacant, which could be a sign that they might be reorganized, eliminated, or downgraded.” 6. Many are anticipating a fairly immediate return-to-office order, right? Any idea how that would be rolled out? Berteau: “The Trump transition has indicated publicly that we can expect numerous executive orders on the first or second day in office. At this time, we do not have any indication of the specifics of a return-to-office mandate or the degree to which it will apply to or affect contractors. Some federal agencies have reduced their office capacity, particularly in the National Capital Region, and some agencies (not USAID to our knowledge) have told on-site contractors that, if all remote federal civilian workers return to office, contractors may have to work offsite. PSC is watching those issues closely. In addition, roughly half of federal civilian employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements, many of which provide specific authority for remote work. We do not know how this might affect either the guidance or the schedule of any return-to-office guidance.” 7. Can the incoming team make changes to projects that implementing partners are already working on, or will most things continue until completion? Berteau: “The federal government has several options available with respect to ongoing contracts. It can deobligate funds not yet expended, it can modify tasks or contracts (with or without commensurate consideration in the contract), it can issue a stop-work order of temporary but perhaps unspecified duration, or it can terminate the contract (perhaps for cause, but more likely for the convenience of the government). At this time, PSC has no indication of plans for any of these actions at USAID.” 8. In your experience, how disruptive are presidential transitions for USAID’s implementing partners, and what are the biggest causes of disruption? Ingram: "They are not very disruptive. Most implementers’ funding is set for a year or two, and that doesn’t get disrupted. The biggest concern should be in year two or three, where policy changes start to be implemented in programs and funding." Berteau: “This is my eighth transition of one president to another, and all of them have some level of disruption. Based on what has been said publicly by Mr. Trump or his announced nominees, this transition has the potential to be more disruptive than some. Both Mr. Trump and OMB Director nominee Russ Vought have written or spoken publicly on the potential reprogramming of funds for purposes other than appropriated or of impounding appropriated funds. Mr. Vought specifically cited impoundment options in his Jan. 15 confirmation hearing. PSC believes that implementing partners should prepare for a wide range of possible actions.”